Study: 65 Percent Of Coal Plants In Danger Of Closure

reply to post by neo96


"Clean coal" is an oxymoron.

It's time to forget about coal.

We have the technology to harvest the sun's rays, the wind and the waves.

What the # are we waiting for?

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by neo96

 

"Clean coal" is an oxymoron.

It's time to forget about coal.

We have the technology to harvest the sun's rays, the wind and the waves.

What the # are we waiting for?

Just how clean are batteries used for alternative energy storage?

Seems to me Alternative energy is an oxymoron because all those products are made from fossil fuels.

reply to post by neo96


Wind is not made from fossil fuels.
The sun is not made from fossil fuels.
Waves are not made from fossil fuels.

reply to post by randomtangentsrme

Well that is exciting. Something that stands in a larger footprint than a 3 foot by 3 foot square (and who knows how tall) that produces 1000 watts of power in the best of conditions.

you have a point about out put of this unit,
but the concept could be very useful for large scale applications,

not a solution, but very interesting how motion can improve efficiencies

xploder

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


Too Funny!

Wind is not made from fossil fuels.

Wind turbines are

The sun is not made from fossil fuels.

Solar panels are

Waves are not made from fossil fuels.

a hydro turbine is.

Furthermore it take a fossil fuel to make those products that make other products, used to deliever them, and install them,

I say again Alternative energy is an oxymoron.

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by randomtangentsrme

 

Well that is exciting. Something that stands in a larger footprint than a 3 foot by 3 foot square (and who knows how tall) that produces 1000 watts of power in the best of conditions.

you have a point about out put of this unit,
but the concept could be very useful for large scale applications,

not a solution, but very interesting how motion can improve efficiencies

xploder

I've got nothing against solar as a concept. But truly practical applications are a distant future.
As neo96 points out all of these "green" techs still use some form of fossil fuels. And I will add to that that they are used inefficiently when compared to the power sources we currently use.

I need a new mouse. . . Double post yet again

reply to post by neo96


You haven't done anything to support the fossil fuel part.

I take it that you're not as well educated.

It is part of BHO's agenda (see first presidential campaign).

reply to post by VaterOrlaag


Educated enough to know that fossil fuels is why the modern world even exists as alternative energy stands right now it's a pipe dream that has been turned in to a political agenda.

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by neo96

 

You haven't done anything to support the fossil fuel part.

I take it that you're not as well educated.

You are missing his point.

He speaks of the fossil fuels required to build the devices to crate the "green" energy. he is talking about the wastes and hazardous material made in the production and disposal of the batteries.

It has nothing to due with 'educated" or not. The payoff isnt good enough yet- if it were the free market would be working and companies like Ford and others (whatever sparse manufacturing we have left) would be switching over of their own will; and for business interests. In other words, if it was more cost effective (long term) why arent we seeing this implemented yet?

The tech isnt there...yet. In another 15-20 years (perhaps more or less) it will hit that point where the tech is good enough and price low enough and payoff big enough- Then the free market will dictate the move.

It will be climate change legislation that wins this argument, unless something big happens.

By big I mean that anthropogenic global warming ends up being a dud.

There's too much AGW hysteria injecting itself into politics. Climate change researchers are saying we're out of time and they're getting more desperate. Their crowd of followers is growing.

Just a matter of time before they flip the big switch.

I am all for clean, cheap energy, but shutting down the coal industry is not the way. I saw a town die [ Morganfield, Ky ] because the mines closed. Miners are not going to spend the money to get retrained as windmill installers. They have to find a job quick and going back to school is not going to feed their families. I am an ex under ground miner, I moved on to construction and welding. Guess how many construction/welding jobs are out there now. Every time "Green Energy" makes a move, it's at the cost of something else.

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by peck420

 

Although this statement is correct, it can not be used for comparison.

Germany occupies 138,000 square miles, with 81 million people. The US occupies 3.8 million square miles, with 316 million people.

The magnitude of work required to transfer one to alternative energy vs the other is...quite frankly, mind boggling.

The US can make the change, but it will not be quick, cheap, or easy.

That makes coal a necessity until the infrastructure for the alternatives covers at least what the coal does currently.

you are correct the challenge is larger because the energy consumption is higher as is the population and area,
but america is leading the way in r&d on solar technologies,

so the intellectual property earnings could "help" with the installation costs.

your scientists are literally on the verge of an energy break through with photo voltaic s

why would the country who designs the best solar technology not roll it out for domestic use?

xploder

Oh, I guess that's why numerous alternative energy companies that were given money have went out of business...

The best solution for this so called energy crisis is Hemp.

Hemp-based plastics are recyclable and biodegradable.

Fuel for transportation can be replaced with hemp-based biofuels. Hemp fuel is clean, efficient, and…if it spills it does not harm the environment, it is more like a fertilizer.

Everything, EVERYTHING, that carbon based fuel does, hemp does, and does it better. So, why are we feeling this pain from fossil fuels?

Maybe that is one reason big oil and others have worked so hard to relate this plant to the "not named on ATS" plant. Fact is, you can smoke a whole trashbag of hemp and never even catch a buzz.

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
The best solution for this so called energy crisis is Hemp.

Hemp-based plastics are recyclable and biodegradable.

Fuel for transportation can be replaced with hemp-based biofuels. Hemp fuel is clean, efficient, and…if it spills it does not harm the environment, it is more like a fertilizer.

Incorrect. After processing, all types of fuel are pretty hazardous to the environment. That includes biodiesels (hemp ethynol). If you would like to see it's effect, pour some (in a contained area) on some plant life. After you remove the dead plants, try growing something. Nature relies on balance. Processing, by the nature of processing, removes that balance.

Everything, EVERYTHING, that carbon based fuel does, hemp does, and does it better. So, why are we feeling this pain from fossil fuels?

Maybe that is one reason big oil and others have worked so hard to relate this plant to the "not named on ATS" plant. Fact is, you can smoke a whole trashbag of hemp and never even catch a buzz.

Grown fuel will never be sustainable unless we make some major breakthroughs in engine efficiency, or in engine output requirements. As it stands now, I don't think we have enough arable land to produce the required quantities of fuel and food at the same time.

The biggest problem right now (besides our insatiable demand for energy) is matching real-time supply to real-time demand. The market has been getting flooded with wind energy, albeit in relatively small quantities, and this energy is incredibly unreliable (in both high and low winds). Solar is intrusive. If you don't know what I mean, google solar 1 and solar 2 near Barstow, CA and look at the arrays. Those were tiny little plants that provided very little energy. ST and PV don't have a lot of prospect yet. Wind has its own disadvantages as well. I'm certainly not against developing the technology, but I'm also going to be sensible about it.

When renewables are thrown into the system en masse, existing technologies, coal in particular, are forced to take up the slack in load and load rejection. Large steam plants don't do this very well. When they can't swing for demand shifts, they have to resort to inefficient and polluting buffers to the system, like simple cycle natural gas and oil fired gas turbine generators. The wonton thrust of renewables with no regulation is actually resulting in more pollution and more expense. Needs to be a better way to introduce renewables.

Trust me. I've been in the power industry for about 30 years.

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
The best solution for this so called energy crisis is Hemp.

Hemp-based plastics are recyclable and biodegradable.

Fuel for transportation can be replaced with hemp-based biofuels. Hemp fuel is clean, efficient, and…if it spills it does not harm the environment, it is more like a fertilizer.

Incorrect. After processing, all types of fuel are pretty hazardous to the environment. That includes biodiesels (hemp ethynol). If you would like to see it's effect, pour some (in a contained area) on some plant life. After you remove the dead plants, try growing something. Nature relies on balance. Processing, by the nature of processing, removes that balance.

Everything, EVERYTHING, that carbon based fuel does, hemp does, and does it better. So, why are we feeling this pain from fossil fuels?

Maybe that is one reason big oil and others have worked so hard to relate this plant to the "not named on ATS" plant. Fact is, you can smoke a whole trashbag of hemp and never even catch a buzz.

Grown fuel will never be sustainable unless we make some major breakthroughs in engine efficiency, or in engine output requirements. As it stands now, I don't think we have enough arable land to produce the required quantities of fuel and food at the same time.

Land mass is a common argument from people that dismiss biofeuels as uneconomical.
This article is from 2009 but has some pretty good information regarding hemp growing on an industrial scale:

hemp-ethanol.blogspot.com...

According to the 3rd edition of “Environmental Chemistry” by Professor Stanley E. Manahan, “Meeting US demands for oil and gas would require that about 6% of the land area of the coterminous 48 states be cultivated intensively for energy production.” (40) According to one source, the US has 60 million idle acres of farmland (41) - about 3% of US land area – and another 130 million or so acres devoted to raising meat (42). According to another source, more than 302 million hectares of land are devoted to producing feed for the U.S. livestock population -- about 272 million hectares in pasture and about 30 million hectares for cultivated feed grains. (43) Either way, it seems there's more than enough land to grow fuel with, if we each eat five or ten fewer steaks every year. As well, urban agriculture is another option to free land up for fuel crops – for example, 6% of Cuba's food supply is grown in the city of Havana. (44) Not only would urban agriculture increase the area available for food, it would conserve energy previously used to transport food.

Another site with alot of useful information on hemp biodiesel production:

www.hemp.com...

This technology does not apply just to biofuels. It is important to understand that hemp provides two types of fuel; hemp biodiesel – made from the oil of the hemp seed, and hemp ethanol/methanol – made from the fermented stalk. In modern times hemp is used for industrial purposes including paper, textiles, clothing, biodegradable plastics, construction (as with Hempcrete and insulation), body products, health food and bio-fuel.

Henry Ford originally designed his “Model A” car to run on either alcohol or gasoline, whichever was available to the driver. And also made a car almost entirely out of hemp. If that could be done 80+ years ago, think of what can be done with todays technology applied.

It was the early 20th century when John D. Rockefeller, owner of Standard Oil (now Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, American BP and a dozen other oil companies), put 4 million dollars into alcohol prohibition. Ford's dream of a nation of plant-powered vehicles was thwarted first by alcohol prohibition, then by hemp prohibition. It was actually re legalized when WWII started because it was considered a necessary crop to support a war time economy. So much so that farmers that grew it were exempt from the draft.
A 1942 U.S. Department of Agriculture film called "Hemp For Victory" extolled the agricultural might of hemp and called for hundreds of thousands of acres to be planted for the war effort. A copy of the video is at the link below.

www.votehemp.com...


Hemp seeds are a source of nutritious high-protien oil that can be used for human and animal consumption. Hemp oil is NOT intoxicating. Extracting protein from hemp is less expensive than extracting protein from soybeans. Hemp protein can be processed and flavored in any way soybean protein can. Hemp oil can also be used to make highly nutritious tofu, butter, cheese, salad oils, and other foods. Hemp oil can also be used to produce paint, varnish, ink, lubricating oils, and plastic susbstitues. Because 50% of the weight of a mature hemp plant is seeds, hemp could become a significant source for these products.

Its really a shame because usually when you mention hemp most people automatically think you are trying to get MJ legalized to smoke but they are two different plants that are from the same family.

The influential Biodiesel magazine reported a few years ago on the cultivation of hemp as a biofuel and it too could only point to its lack of economic competitiveness (due to its minimal production) as a reason for not seeing it as a viable biofuel. But surely if it was mass-produced, this one drawback could be overcome and its many benefits as an efficient biofuel could be harnessed.

As far as research and implementation of hemp for biofuel, the US is way ahead of Europe and there are a range of websites dedicated to the use of hemp as a fuel for cars.

There is no crop on earth that can satisfy our energy needs without doing more destruction than using current resources. It's been proven again and again. People who fixate on things like soy, corn, rapeseed, hemp, and the like aren't doing their homework. Any crop takes up space. Harvesting any crop takes fuel and heavy machinery. Energy per unit area figures are horrible for crop energies. Side effects, like fertilizers, tilling, erosion, and energy required for the processing equipment and transportation make ALL of these unfeasible.